Tolerance cannot be measured in terms of degrees of intolerance. I am essentially opposed to burning books even when they incite others to violence. But freedom is either an absolute or it is conditioned on not inciting others to violence. Anything else is rationalized bigotry.

Search This Blog

Friday, August 21, 2015

Jeremy Corbyn and the Fascist Threat

“Those in authority should have stopped the
obscenity of past-war fascism. They didn’t. So, we did.” Morris Beckman (The 43
Group)

Most people just want a life lived without
unnecessary distraction, pain, or inconvenience. A few go out of their way to
cause suffering, to coerce and to spoil the simple world we live in.Miseducation is crucial in any attempt to
control society. They create fear, but most important, they attempt to fashion
us in their image, or at least, in the image they believe we need to fit.

I use the word “image” because they are akin to
idolaters – their god is fashioned from an ideal they passionately believe we
must follow – whether it is for their profit, our benefit or someone else's
benefit is of no consequence because their self-belief is immutable and
therefore any debate is also irrelevant.They demand obedience from us and subservience to them.Oppose them and you are damned.If this sounds like fascism it is because it
is just that.I accuse the radical left (of
which Mr Jeremy Corbyn is an honored member) of fascism for good reason.

Fascism can be defined in almost any way but
its primary contemporary usage seems to have deteriorated so that it is now
understood to be little more than an epithet to be used against those with whom
we passionately disagree. But in his book “Liberal Fascism” Jonah Goldberg says
“the liberal fascist project can be characterized as the effort to delegitimize
good dogma by claiming all dogma is bad.”I would modify that by stating that fascism is the replacement of one
set of beliefs with another, using propaganda in place of fact; sophistry and
mendacity as tools of trade.Jeremy
Corbyn and his kind provide good examples of this.

In an interview with Britain’s
premier broadcasting network, BBC Television managed to educate a new
generation of people about a Jewish blood libel while giving Britain’s
leading Labour Party contender for leader of the opposition an easy ride that
forgave him his iniquity in consistently siding with holocaust deniers, racists
and antisemites.

The tools of fascism are simple – lie
consistently and the people will replace the truth with your updated narrative.A few days ago Jeremy Corbyn was interviewed
by the BBC about his past – he denied knowing that a friend was a holocaust
denier and referred to meeting up with him some fifteen years earlier. Since
that interview, a photograph has surfaced on the official internet site of holocaust
denier Paul Eisen.It shows Corbyn at a formal
reception for Eisens’ organization (Deir Yassin Remembered), held in 2013.

Corbyn was also given the opportunity to
explain to the BBC and its millions of viewers that Eisen’s organization was
all about keeping in the public memory an atrocity allegedly carried out by
“the Zionists” (failing to mention his organization being the vehicle for a
holocaust denying Jew hater). The BBC
then showed bodies piled neatly up but unlike any other news program I have ever encountered failed to provide any
warning that it was going to show the photo. Jeremy Corbyn deliberately misled
the public on British national television when he stated that the massacre was
the work of “Zionists”.In 1948 there
were Arabs and there were Palestinians – all organizations of administration
and governance in Palestine with the name “Palestine” in the title were
Jewish.

The radical left has followed the Arab/Muslim
lead in dividing Jews into two groups, those who are anti-Israel and the
rest.Jeremy Corbyn deliberately misrepresented
a conflict that was never that simple because central to the Arab-Israeli
conflict is Arab conquest inextricably mixed with Islamic theological prejudice.
Corbyn demonized all Jews living in Palestine
at that time and if we follow through with his unspoken logic, accused all Jews
of supporting terror simply by identifying with the Jewish right to
self-determination.

The Arabs do not and did not (in 1948) kill
Zionists – they kill(ed) Jews.But
massacres carried out by people are rarely, if ever referred to as massacres
carried out by Muslims. They are carried out by ISIL (an acronym few people can
break down by its constituent letters).They are carried out by organizations. In Palestine the militias were identified as
socialists, as right wingers or as Arabs dedicated to a pan-Arab unity against
the rest. The massacre was carried out
by Palestinian fighters against local Arabs.Specifically it was carried out by Irgun and Lehi fighters.But Corbyn was scoring points, aided and
abetted by the BBC.

Here is my problem with the fascist, Jeremy
Corbyn.He lies, he is indifferent to
the consequences of his actions, and he is morally selective in his support of
those who justify religious genocide. He calls an antisemite who propagates
blood libels against Jews his friend. He dishonestly applies general principles
to particular cases of moral conduct (in this case, his anti-Zionism is
antisemitism because he deliberately chooses to ignore the prejudice and religious
hatred that is fundamental to the beliefs of Israel’s enemies).

It is truly simple. If he is not anti-Jewish he
has no problem sharing a platform with those people who are anti-Jewish, or,
calling them his friends and proclaiming the validity of their causes. What
does that make of the morality of the man who would be Prime Minister of Great
Britain?

The man who would be prime minister has also
worked for Iranian State TV – so he has received money from an organisation
that is the international mouthpiece for a regime that again, denies the
holocaust as well as hanging gays, persecuting its Baha’i minority, murdering
members of the radical left (such as he), crushing free speech and killing protesters.

I started this blog with a quote from a founder
of the 43 Group.The 43 Group were an
anti-fascist organisation set up after World War 2 by Jewish ex-servicemen (and
women) as a consequence of the support given to British fascist and antisemitic
organizations by the Labour government of Clement Atlee (not known for his love
of Jews)!I call it support because the
fascists used the Public Order Act of 1936 and the Public Meetings Act of 1908
to prevent Jews from defending themselves against fascist incitement and
violence.In the years that followed the
end of World War 2 news of Hitler’s death camps was often the subject of
headlines and graphic newsreels.And yet
Labour governments were conspicuous by their inactivity against fascism. In the
timeliness of their non-support for Britain’s returning Jewish
servicemen and women (as well as ordinary citizens) Britain's Labour government encouraged and was
therefore complicit in fascism’s antisemitic incitement.

The Left and not just the radical left have
always had a problem with Jewish rights; we have the right to assume that this prejudice
extends to Jews as a group and as individuals.There will always be people who will point out the large number of Jews
who have been ideologically and intellectually at the forefront of radical and
left wing politics. But almost always this has been at the expense of any positive
Jewish identity.It is easy to
understand why.If acceptance means
renunciation of part of ones own identity, Jewish Uncle Toms have been
consistent in using a wholly specious anti-Judaism to gain that acceptance and speak
with an essentially spurious Jewish authority when attacking Jews and Judaism.

The crux of the matter is that Jeremy Corbyn
comes across as a true social democrat, a person who cares about people and
supports minorities irrespective of their race, religion, sex or sexuality. At
the same time he is politically in bed with people and organizations that are
misogynistic, fascistic, murderous, classically anti-democratic and
antisemitic.

Can we then trust him to be a leader for all
the people of Britain?
Only a fool would believe that.

4 comments:

3 questions. What are his chances of winning leadership of the Labour Party? If he wins how do you think he'd go in a general election? If he attained leadership of the Labour Party do you think he will be a force for decline or growth of the party?

Corbyn's chances of election are very good - even with the possibility that people took up membership with the sole aim of destabilizing the Labor Party his support amongst the regular membership was higher than the other candidates. His policies are populist and as a back bencher for his entire career in parliament (32 years) he has been consistent throughout although showing occasional extremely poor judgment. That does not make him unelectable. In a general election he could win. People are frustrated by politics and economically insecure – it is only people who are secure who obsess over foreign policy issues! So in theory he could bring about a protracted period of growth in Labor party membership (even if Jews flee in droves).

I hope to God that he never gets a chance as that would mean that the respect from the UK government for the self determination of Gibraltarians would vanish, he is no social democrat as he disrespected the self determination rights of Gib and the Falkland islands when he stated he would give both away without hesitation. A Gibraltarian.